AL MVP Shenanigans
 

The Trout v. Miggy debate seems to be as fierce as the Presidential election, with traditionalists vs. saber metric proponents at each others throats and not lending an ear to the other side. They both think they are superior, just like fatass Jonah Hill vs. the crusty scouts in "Moneyball." How do you guys feel about all this?

Cabrera won the triple crown, what's to argue? If he hadn't had won the triple crown Trout would have been MVP. People need to shut up and agree with me.

Any other year, Trout probably wins.

But come on: Triple Crown.

Trout is better and should have been MVP, I care way too much about this

Both men were deserving I feel but the amount of vitriol and hostility from people on both sides towards another really caught my attention. It's not like Raul Mondesi swooped in and stole the MVP.

would be pretty awesome if everyone voted for a player who has been retired for like 10 years

or Vladimir Guerrerro

Vladimir Guerrero deserves the MVP award every year.

Montreal Vlad over Anaheim Vlad

Love that Raul Mondesi was the example.

Any Vlad over everyone.

I was waffling between him and the venerable Ryan Klesko.

You made the right choice.

Vlad won the World Series this year

Triple Crown is always going to be seen as more valuable than a Rookie of the Year award regardless how great of a rookie season someone had.

Trout had 3 real problems with the voters not wanting a loosing team having the MVP like in 2003, Cabrera had better head-to-head stats in most categories, and Trout missing the first month along with his decline in September.

They were both deserving. Somebody had to lose.

If you win the Triple Crown you should get MVP ten times out of ten.

That this is even a debate is retarded.

Well it would be if half of MLB fans didn't have a collective shit fit that their new golden boy (Trout) got "robbed." Their was a lot of crap being thrown around online and in the sports talk world about this and I didn't get it either, but I guess the Triple Crown is considered a fluke and non-impoortant to Sabermetricians these days.

Most Valuable Player to me always means that if you take said player out of the team, which team is hurt the most by it..... without Cabrera, Detroit still had Verlander & Fielder, whereas the Angels had pretty much nobody.... that's why I feel Trout should have won, depite Cabrera having the better season..... if Cabrera had been playing on the Marlins, Blue Jays, Red Sox or another shitty team, he would easily won it IMO.....

Methinks Nicky Fives needs to take a look at the Angels roster again

http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images...jpg?1336525199


NOBODY

http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=...ng&w=350&h=254

NOBODY

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6210/6...e1966128_z.jpg

NOBODY

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...l_14,_2012.jpg

WHO THE FUCK IS THIS GUY?

http://www.toriihunterproject.com/im...-head-shot.png

NEVER SEEN THIS GUY BEFORE

http://nbchardballtalk.files.wordpre...x190.jpg?w=320

THIS GUY IS SUCH A NOBODY EVEN THE BREWERS DIDNT WANT HIM

Andre Dawson?

Is that you Hawk?

people need to remember that WAR is a projection of a player vs a fictional replacement. pretty wishy-washy imo
triple crown. actually happened

It's most valuable player in the league, the best player. Not most valuable player to his team or if he was taken off who would be worse.

Dumb.

False. Team contribution is a key part of the Most Valuable player award voting.

There really is no hard rule as to what is criteria. They give you a guideline, but voters are always going to have their own direction.

Stats and performance is what matters and I think that shows in the voting, as it should.

$147 million worth of NOBODY

True.